Oh yes, there was. I don't think Tate could have ever managed, for example, this. He never had to sing over such twisted, odd material.

That song is dreadfully boring! And I have listened to The Spectre Within numerous times since this site recommends it immensely!Give me Ivory Gate Of Dreams any day! John Arch is a terrific singer and I can actually see songs like Queen Of TheReich, Warning and Speak fitting him like a glove but overall Geoff Tate is a better singer because he is more well rounded. He just isn't as wonderfully idiosyncratic as Arch, but maybe that isn't a terrible thing after all!

Bleh. No Exit fan.

The Arch era was significantly better than that dreck, and that's coming from somebody who loved Parallels and FWX.

Ivory Gate of Dreams feels to me like it's just a collection of riffs and not a complete composition but I still prefer No Exit to Parallels and FWX even if it's nothing compared to Perfect Symmetry or A Pleasant Shade of Gray, not to mention the Arch era FW! And what I think about the whole Arch vs Tate thing is this: Arch have a great talent of figuring up awesome, wailing vocal melodies to go with the music and some times IN SPITE OF THE MUSIC. He just make it all fit. He's voice and technique isn't as strong as younger Tate's but he sounds very "humane" and that's something that fits those old Fates Warning albums because he also wrote very humane lyrics and that's another aspect of his talent. I love his lyrics on Spectre Within and Awaken the Guardian. More than anything Tate with the exception few songs. So I think both are great singers but in a different way.

_________________

Napero wrote:

I'd love to blast a bit of Voivod and make a better-looking gun turret to glue on the tortoise's shell to make it look like Killing Technology, but the wife won't let me. I think I'll get an Emperor penguin instead.

Can't stand No Exit, the only Fates Warning album that I really do not like at all. There are maybe 90 seconds of music that I enjoy on that album, total. Alder's constantly out-of-tune screeching is just awful. This, too, is from a fan of mid/late-period FW.

Regardless, Arch's vocal lines are undeniably more twisted and complex than anything Tate ever sang. The material under them was more complicated than Queensryche's music, as well, and really early Fates Warning would not have worked with anything less than a vocalist like Arch who could write vocal lines competitively busy to split the emphasis with the riffs. As much as I admire Geoff Tate's singing, he would have sounded lost on Spectre and Guardian.

_________________

iamntbatman wrote:

manowar are literally five times the band that fates warning are: each member is as good as fates warning alone, then joey's bass solos are like an entire extra fates warning

As far as Fates versus Queenrsyche goes. I think Fates Warning's music is a lot harder to sing over, in general (I refer to the only Fates stuff that matters here). Queensryche always seemed to give Tate a lot of room to throw his voice around on those albums, there was lots of space for him to do his thing and what have you; it's as if they were aware that he was their biggest selling point. Whereas Fates's music was often very complicated but never cluttered, and yet Arch always managed to weave intricate melodies over it.

I'd take Arch any day, as a stand alone singer, but Tate is more well rounded yes, which actually proves to be to his disadvantage (for instance, Tate took to singing boring pop-metal, AOR, Gaga-aping pop and what have you)... worst of all, because he knew he was so good he developed a HUGE FUCKING EGO.

_________________'Heavy metal top of the class, stuff the media up your arse!' - Den Dennis.

I think he's even better now, from a pure vocal perspective.Check this out, Arch playing Fates material this year...

Dude, I hate to break it to you, but you're totally blindsided by fanboy-ism, here. The very links you provided as proof that he's so good today actually prove the exact opposite. The guy isn't a 10th the singer he used to be, from a pure vocal perspective. Why do you reckon he jumps around, taps his belly awkwardly and make the crowd chant so much, exactly? When he does get a high(-ish) note out, it's barely on key, if that. Not that it's cause for shame, at his age and given how outstanding he used to be back then. People age, including singers, that's life. But no, no, no, he does not sing anywhere near as good as he used to, man. Neither does Tate, for that matter.

Dude, I hate to break it to you, but you're totally blindsided by fanboy-ism, here. The very links you provided as proof that he's so good today actually prove the exact opposite. The guy isn't a 10th the singer he used to be, from a pure vocal perspective. Why do you reckon he jumps around, taps his belly awkwardly and make the crowd chant so much, exactly? When he does get a high(-ish) note out, it's barely on key, if that. Not that it's cause for shame, at his age and given how outstanding he used to be back then. People age, including singers, that's life. But no, no, no, he does not sing anywhere near as good as he used to, man. Neither does Tate, for that matter.

I think you're exaggerating woefully trying to make a point. It wasn't perfect, but Arch still laid down a damn fine performance. To say he's not a tenth of what he was is insulting and downright wrong.

Geoff Tate, on the other hand, is pure shit these days. I saw all of the infamous "you guys suck" show, and he couldn't do any of those songs. Pathetic.

Why do you reckon he jumps around, taps his belly awkwardly and make the crowd chant so much, exactly?

Um, because he's a frontman and a frontman's main job other than singing is getting the crowd into it? As far as getting the crowd going, Arch was the best there bar none. Obviously he can't harmonize with himself in a live setting, so getting the crowd to help out makes perfect sense too. Besides which, you're basing your estimation of how he sounds now on a poorly-recorded video uploaded to Youtube. I was actually there, and he sounded great. There were some misses here and there, sure, but they were largely inconsequential, and the guy hadn't performed live in 25 years. On top of which, he was getting over a sore throat at the time. You're comparing a crappy-quality recording of a live performance to 30-year-old studio recordings - it's not like he never missed notes when he sang live in the 80s. Listen to Arch/Matheos's album if you want to hear how he sounds at his best today.

_________________

MorbidBlood wrote:

So the winner is Destruction and Infernal Overkill is the motherfucking skullcrushing poserkilling satan-worshiping 666 FUCK YOU greatest german thrash record.

Remember the proposed Three Tremors (Halford, Dickninson & Tate) project.That would have been a perfect opportunity for Geoff Tate to redeem himself although I couldn't see him doing that while making albums like Q2K at the same time.

I think he's even better now, from a pure vocal perspective.Check this out, Arch playing Fates material this year...

Dude, I hate to break it to you, but you're totally blindsided by fanboy-ism, here. The very links you provided as proof that he's so good today actually prove the exact opposite. The guy isn't a 10th the singer he used to be, from a pure vocal perspective. Why do you reckon he jumps around, taps his belly awkwardly and make the crowd chant so much, exactly? When he does get a high(-ish) note out, it's barely on key, if that. Not that it's cause for shame, at his age and given how outstanding he used to be back then. People age, including singers, that's life. But no, no, no, he does not sing anywhere near as good as he used to, man. Neither does Tate, for that matter.

In other news, any further developments in the actual case?

Besides, what Failsafeman said, I was refering to the way he sings now, he was a more refined style that I like better and I think it's better than his more odd ol' style; he retains all the good of this 'prime' time and adds a more tasteful approach to the construction of his vocal lines, which you can listen in the best sound available in the Arch/Matheos album.

I posted the vids cause, leaving the crowd aside, I can hear him doing a fine rendition of the old songs and for a guy who hasn't been on a stage in 2 and half decades, it's impressive, to say the least. You can see how much he was enjoying it

Oddly enough, I wasn't comparing him to Tate, I was actually giving a compliment to Geoff that there are very few guys who could handle his old songs properly, one of them being Arch, which is for me one of the best, if not the best singer in prog metal.

@Metal_Detector: Like failsafeman perfectly sensed, as far as my experience of Arch's singing goes, I went straight from 'Awaken the Guardian' to those recent live links Kveldulfr posted here, which was quite a shock for me, especially after he insisted the guy sounded every bit as good nowadays, if not better, as he did back then.

failsafeman wrote:

On top of which, he was getting over a sore throat at the time. You're comparing a crappy-quality recording of a live performance to 30-year-old studio recordings - it's not like he never missed notes when he sang live in the 80s. Listen to Arch/Matheos's album if you want to hear how he sounds at his best today.

Well, that figures. Those videos were really not a great choice to demonstrate how well preserved the man's voice is. I've just checked some tracks off of the Arch/Matheos album right now. He sounds pretty great on it; actually close to his early 80s self indeed. On a side note, do you mean to say that he was already doing the jumping around while tapping his belly routine back in the day?

@Kveldulfr: I see where you're coming from, man, but I maintain that those recent live performances you linked to actually worked against your point (to my ears, at least). The recent studio stuff, however, did convince me: he's still a great singer to this day. I still prefer how he sounded in the 80s, but the loss in power isn't tremendous.

Technical abilities are overrated, anyhow. Obviously, you need the lead singer to have enough range, precision and stamina to perform those vocal lines correctly, but to really stand out, you want him to have something unique and touching to his singing even more. On that note, I'm not thrilled about this Todd La Torre fellow; he sings great, but he follows Tate's vocal lines and even additional vocals like "yeah!" and "alright!" too closely to my tastes. I also have my doubts about him fronting both QR and CG at the same time.

On a side note, do you mean to say that he was already doing the jumping around while tapping his belly routine back in the day?

I dunno, probably. Tapping his belly = air drumming. It was fine, and way way way better than just standing around and headbanging or whatever when not singing, which is what most of the other guys did. So many frontmen (especially the younger ones) forget that people are watching as well as listening. John Arch was definitely fun to watch.

_________________

MorbidBlood wrote:

So the winner is Destruction and Infernal Overkill is the motherfucking skullcrushing poserkilling satan-worshiping 666 FUCK YOU greatest german thrash record.

@failsafeman: Well, it sure sounds like you had a great time! And I can understand, I mean those guys back together and playing all those classics is certainly exciting. Arch looks like he was having an awesome time as well, even though the way he moves still looks a bit odd for me to watch, I'm sure it's sincere. (But isn't it also air drumming when you pretend you're the drummer and play air drums? )

@LegendMaker, LaTorre obviously respects the stature of a band like Queensryche and is a bit afraid to veer off the trail so soon by bringing his own interpretations to the table. Fans might not appreciate it and etc - all very logical fears.Queensryche was held in such high regard once upon a time (kind of hard to believe now, isn't it) and agreeing that Tate is a prick and then standing on a stage to sing the songs he sang so well all those years ago, you should get the feeling you're tapping into something special...and you'd be careful not to fuck it up.

Give him time to get comfy, he'll burst out quite nicely.I, for one, I am looking forward to an album with him at the helm...and a new CG one as well.

@iAmDisturbed: Sure, I get that he's reluctant to give the songs his own interpretation for now, and his bandmates probably recruited him specifically for his ability to mimic Tate's versions in the first place. You know, it's just that singing so damn close to every detail of the studio version almost makes me think of a singing contest. Sure, Tate happens to have sung "queen of the raaaaiiiiiieeeiiiish" at that precise point in the song; it doesn't mean it' not acceptable for his successor to sing it as "queen of the raaaaiiiiiieeeiieeeiish" instead. Or I don't know, say "oh yeah" a few seconds earlier or later, or just say "come on" instead. Make it your own, you're the lead singer, now!

As far as Crimson Glory goes, I don't know. They've been on hiatus for over a decade since their mixed bag reunion in 1999, Midnight died at some point during this period, and they had finally recruited this guy and started working on a new comeback album. To be honest, it kind of looks like a dick move by the Queensrÿche guys, taking this one guy from them. Even if he stays with CG now, it'll diminish the impact of their reunion, and the two bands are likely going to be worse off than if Wilton & co had bothered to recruit a guy not already singing for an old rival, legendary band. That's all I'm saying. Just imagine how you would have reacted if Maiden had recruited Tim Owens as their new lead singer while Priest was still working on 'Jugulator' with him.

1-Use someone who can sing in a similar way to the previous one, so the shock for the fans and the band will be less. Given time, the singer will develop his own style while new songs are being written and recorded (See Journey and Arnel Pineda).

2-Use someone who has a completely different voice, often to emphatize a drastic change of sound (see Nightwish).

Both ways can work or fail, all depending on how well the new guy does and how strong is the new material.

I, for instance, have plenty of faith on this Tateless 'rÿche, LaTorre it's pretty good.

1-Use someone who can sing in a similar way to the previous one, so the shock for the fans and the band will be less. Given time, the singer will develop his own style while new songs are being written and recorded (See Journey and Arnel Pineda).

2-Use someone who has a completely different voice, often to emphatize a drastic change of sound (see Nightwish).

Both ways can work or fail, all depending on how well the new guy does and how strong is the new material.

I, for instance, have plenty of faith on this Tateless 'rÿche, LaTorre it's pretty good.

Personally I prefer option 2. Option 1 can work but at its best, it nearly always ends up being good, but not as good as the old stuff. 2 on the other hand gets us Black Sabbath with Dio, Black Sabbath with Tony Martin, Cloven Hoof with Russ North, Vicious Rumors with Brian Allen, Candlemass with Messiah Marcolin, hell, even Iron Maiden with Bruce Dickinson. Soundalike singers might be good in the short run in that they can often sing the old material better, but distinctive singers encourage the band to try something different and better suited to a different combination of personalities.

_________________

MorbidBlood wrote:

So the winner is Destruction and Infernal Overkill is the motherfucking skullcrushing poserkilling satan-worshiping 666 FUCK YOU greatest german thrash record.

Is it just me, or does he look incredibly... gay? Like beyond Rob Halford gay?

Haha. Wow, that's a fine, tasteful, and fresh pun right there, bro, what with Halford's coming out having taken place just yesterday, and all. Witty.

Cruciphage wrote:

No, he looks like a fucking pretentious asshole begging for a brutal curb-stomping. All cocky and sneering. Fuck him.

To be fair, the shots of the audience in that video excerpt are quite depressing: it looks half empty, I don't see any pit, there are many empty seats, and I can spot at best 2-3 people who look like they might be into metal, and none who seem to be happy to be there. It's certainly not encouraging.

To be fairer, whose fault was that, exactly? I saw QueensRÿche once in the early 90s, a time when their setlist and overall sound sucked considerably less than what this poor crowd in Rocklahoma must have endured, and even then I was bored shitless and spent a good 2/3 of their show drinking in the far back, waiting for the next band. That show was the same, but after the string of post-Degarmo shitty albums we know, and without any of the classic songs to help swallow the pill. In no small part due to this pretentious dick. So yeah, if "that's all there is," then you suck, Mr Ego.

To be fair, the shots of the audience in that video excerpt are quite depressing: it looks half empty, I don't see any pit, there are many empty seats, and I can spot at best 2-3 people who look like they might be into metal, and none who seem to be happy to be there. It's certainly not encouraging.

As someone who's dabbled in live performing--theater, specifically--I can understand this. A good crowd does wonders for the energy of the performer.

Quote:

To be fairer, whose fault was that, exactly? I saw QueensRÿche once in the early 90s, a time when their setlist and overall sound sucked considerably less than what this poor crowd in Rocklahoma must have endured, and even then I was bored shitless and spent a good 2/3 of their show drinking in the far back, waiting for the next band. That show was the same, but after the string of post-Degarmo shitty albums we know, and without any of the classic songs to help swallow the pill. In no small part due to this pretentious dick. So yeah, if "that's all there is," then you suck, Mr Ego.

I found that "YOLO" shit the funniest part of the clip. The unwitting subtext of his statement was "it doesn't get any better than a lukewarm Queensryche show." I've never been a huge fan of Queensryche, so that thought is about as appealing as a sweaty fat guy dropping a deuce in my mouth.

_________________Incidentally, Ruben Rosas has very nice handwriting. The soul of a poet, one might say.

Just imagine how you would have reacted if Maiden had recruited Tim Owens as their new lead singer while Priest was still working on 'Jugulator' with him.

As someone that's only listened to a handful of songs by Crimson Glory, all this did was cringe at the thought of Tim Owens singing The Sign Of The Cross. I love both albums and both of the singers on them, but that combination should never happen...

But yeah, I decided to watch their performance at Rocklahoma and he just hurts to watch. Maybe it's more awesome being there but all this is doing is making me cringe some more and I actually like a fair amount of the songs they're playing. Here's hoping the new shows are even better!

Just imagine how you would have reacted if Maiden had recruited Tim Owens as their new lead singer while Priest was still working on 'Jugulator' with him.

As someone that's only listened to a handful of songs by Crimson Glory, all this did was cringe at the thought of Tim Owens singing The Sign Of The Cross. I love both albums and both of the singers on them, but that combination should never happen...

That's fair. But my point is more on the overall impact of just the fact that they will have the same singer, regardless of how each band sounds with him. I mean, going back to my Maiden/Priest image, 'Jugulator' would have been perceived first and foremost as "the Priest is back! Now with Maiden's singer..." I'm afraid that's what it's going to be for Crimson Glory when/if they release their comeback album with La Torre and after the QueensRÿche with La Torre album... And just to be clear, I'm a huge fan of classic CG, whereas I only really like some of QR's early stuff. So to me, it's more important that Crimson Glory's come back works than QuensRÿche's return to form (even though I'm skeptical about both).

Is it just me, or does he look incredibly... gay? Like beyond Rob Halford gay?

Haha. Wow, that's a fine, tasteful, and fresh pun right there, bro, what with Halford's coming out having taken place just yesterday, and all. Witty.

Not a pun. No play on words here. It is quite literal. Tate is looking pretty damn flamboyant. If you told me he was gay and I didn't know who he was, I'd be all "yeah, and the sky's blue. What of it?"

On the topic of half-assing the show, while the performer may feed off the crowd's energy, as the saying goes, the show must go on. Just because you're playing to a half-empty auditorium to people who are falling asleep to your show doesn't give you an excuse to shit all over them. Someone who's been doing this as long as Tate should know at least that much.

_________________

843182 wrote:

biohazard the band is not is when you want to add it to tell you that there is

So, Arch's vocals are average? I think his vocals sound perfectly different from anyone, not just his tone (which isn't common), but his range, passion and especially his approach of vocal lines makes him a totally different singer from your average prog/heavy vocalist. If you add a maestro in songwriting like Jim Matheos to his vocal skills you have a brilliant band and material, which is what early Fates stands in prog metal (Alder is good, but Arch is better and how many prog metal bands don't recognize/show a huge fellation and influence from Fates?). If you listen the new Arch/Matheos album, you hear the guy and without a mistake you know is Arch. How many singers can say that? after decades, how many of those unique singers can sing exactly ike they did before and also handling perfectly the older material? even less. Also, the guy is a great lyricist. He's just the whole package, like Dio was.

I understand people not liking Arch for his nasal tone and odd vocal melodies, but those elements are exactly what makes him different.

I think he's good, just not as good as people say he is. He has an inventive sense of melody and an easily recognizable voice, but a number of serious weaknesses, especially the fact that he can be very sloppy when not properly rehearsed, and suffers when performing material written for other singers. His cover of "Die Young" on the Awaken the Guardian rerelease is off in places and lacks the power than Dio brought to the song. He is one good USPM singer out of many that were plying the trade in 1986.

DeathBySuicide wrote:

Give me Ivory Gate Of Dreams any day.

Why? That song is pretty much Fates Warning's musical original sin--drab, disorganized, meandering. I hear that and I hear the seed that gave rise to A Pleasant Shade of Gray, an album that could be used as anaesthesia. When you go from the amazing first half of that album to "The Ivory Gate of Dreams", the difference in quality is obvious. Also it highlights Ray Alder's own weaknesses--his Halford scream was really great but his lower range is lacking in presence and charisma.

_________________

narsilianshard wrote:

I can think of a thousand reasons why being a teacher is more rewarding than being in a metalcore band.

Why do you reckon he jumps around, taps his belly awkwardly and make the crowd chant so much, exactly?

Um, because he's a frontman and a frontman's main job other than singing is getting the crowd into it? As far as getting the crowd going, Arch was the best there bar none. Obviously he can't harmonize with himself in a live setting, so getting the crowd to help out makes perfect sense too. Besides which, you're basing your estimation of how he sounds now on a poorly-recorded video uploaded to Youtube. I was actually there, and he sounded great. There were some misses here and there, sure, but they were largely inconsequential, and the guy hadn't performed live in 25 years. On top of which, he was getting over a sore throat at the time. You're comparing a crappy-quality recording of a live performance to 30-year-old studio recordings - it's not like he never missed notes when he sang live in the 80s. Listen to Arch/Matheos's album if you want to hear how he sounds at his best today.

Not really a fair comparison I'd wager I've seen clips of Arch performing and he doesn't move around as much as Tate, and Fates Warning never performed to crowds 2/4 the size of Queensryche's. Of course in a more intimate setting Arch can deliver a better performance, that in reference to a clip someone posted of the Arch/Matheos material a while back. In terms of range, I also don't see Arch matching tate much either in terms of anything else other than those odd nasally highs. Tate could sing melodically, croon in a lower voice as on The Warning, and hit the highs in a much more soothing voice as opposed to Arch.

_________________

Malignanthrone wrote:

Thing is, Suicide Silence actually are more sonically massive than a good 95% of all the death metal bands in the Archives! Not metal, sure, but definitely a lot more brutal.

Under_Starmere wrote:

Manowar aren't the Kings of Metal. They're pretenders to a throne that doesn't exist.!

Just watched the "you suck" Youtube clip again and man the second hand embarassment...to think this arrogant king of douches actually came across as likeable in interview clips during the 80s/90s...

I managed to watch the entire show online and the most insulting part of this segment is how he leads them into the most condescending version of Silent Lucidity immediately after this insult. So yes, this outburst is somehow even worse in context...

People I love Fates Warning as much as the next guy (more than Queensryche for that matter) but could we stay on topic? The only thing I'll say about the Arch vs Tate thing is that Tate does have more range. While I think both are impressive in their prime with their tone and melodic control, Arch has never developed a true lower range. Tate has had some fairly bassy moments when you think about it (Lowest part in "Speak", "Someone Else", "Lady Jane", "Silent Lucidity" etc.).

I for one fully support Queensryche's decision to move on without Tate, but I'll wait to see how good it is. I like La Torre, but he hasn't really been given the opportunity to sing on original material yet. I have a feeling once he does we'll get to see more of his true talent.

"There's no hard feelings. I think that the things that were said between me and Geoff, a lot of it got blown out of propotion, a lot of those feelings and… whatever. When I went and saw them in New York a few weeks ago, they were all totally open arms to me, and Geoff was cool. And the next night when they were here on Eddie's show, they were totally cool about it.

"You know what it is? I think when we toured together with them, it was a co-headlining thing — we were sharing the lights and the video and the sound. We had to work together on a lot of things. And I'm very used to running our band and our organization and our live touring situation a certain way, and I guess Geoff is used to it his way, so inevitably, as much of a great time we had, there was also moments where I wanted something some way and he maybe wanted it the other, so as kind of the two heads of our organizations, inevitably, maybe, he got turned off by my headstrongness and same vice versa. I guess when you're kind of a perfectionist, or a controlling person, and you have to kind of share that situation with another band, it's tough, and maybe some of it rubbed him the wrong way. But I've had nothing but good stuff to say about that tour we did together — it was a lot of fun, every night we jammed together, and I thought it was a great thing for the fans, and we had a good time. There were little things here and there in terms of the whole behind-the-scenes thing, but it was really all a very, very good-spirited tour.

"It's hard in the age of the Internet to keep things cool and not get blown up. After what went down here with Geoff and me, it was all over Blabbermouth the next day and then from there it was on every web site from here to Australia, and the fans get into it with each other, and they blow it up, and every word is dissected. That's the scary part. I know I did a Metal Sludge interview back in 2000 — it was like six years ago — and I still get heat over that. Because everything you say on the Internet gets spread around and people just blow it up into the biggest thing.

This fall, Geoff Tate Electric Band will be releasing his new solo metal album on Inside Out Music, which features such label mates as King’s X, Fates Warning, Pain of Slavation and Dream Theater’s frontman James LaBrie, and many others! Geoff Tate solo tour dates with Alice Cooper beginning in November.***Watch for the announcement of the upcoming 2013 Queensryche Anniversary Tour featuring an All-Star lineup, starring Geoff Tate, the longtime creative and driving force behind the band, whose vocals can be heard on every Queensryche song ever released!***

aka the "Fuck you guys, I'm still using the Queensryche name" tour.

_________________

John_Sunlight wrote:

Gif logos are a rare and special thing. They should be reserved only for truly exceptional and rare and special and important bands, bands like Blind Guardian and... Blind Guardian. This should be in the rules.